Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "RT/meetings/PMC Minutes 081024"

< RT‎ | meetings
 
Line 42: Line 42:
 
* Some discussion around ECF "3.0".  What is changing such that it should be called 3.0?
 
* Some discussion around ECF "3.0".  What is changing such that it should be called 3.0?
  
[[Category:RT]]
+
[[Category:EclipseRT]]
[[Category:RT/Meeting]]
+
 
[[Category:Meeting]]
 
[[Category:Meeting]]

Latest revision as of 11:31, 11 May 2009

  • Call convened at 0900 ET
  • Call-in: 613.287.8000 or 866.362.7064, passcode 892048#

Attendees

  • Jeff McAffer
  • Tom Watson
  • Jochen Krause

Discussion

PMC meetings

Currently there are four active members of the PMC. Is this enough? Are we active enough?

  • Should look to expand the membership but more importantly get more participation from the projects.
  • We agreed that the PMC calls were open, we should do more to invite leaders from the projects to join the calls.
  • propose that every meeting one of the projects talk about how they are doing, technology issues and challenges they face, procedural hurdles, ... This would be very informative to the other of the projects and would hopefully foster some more interaction and coordination between the projects.

Moves

  • eRCP - getting geared up to move
  • SAT
    • move to Equinox as discussed before
  • DeviceKit
    • how big is it? code? committers?
    • is this a significant number of committers?
    • should investigate
    • How much tooling is there?
  • RAP is now a RT project

SMILA

The SMILA project has created a map of their architecture and the third party libs.

  • Jochen approved their request on Spring, ODE and some other small easy things
  • There are still some issues around the Berkley DB. It appears that there are no other suitable technologies that are under a reasonable license. Looking for an XML database.
  • This is the store for the database. Performance is the issue
  • We want to enable them to deliver something that works out of the box but that not need to be fast.
  • This has the added benefit of forcing SMILA to be pluggable/extensible
  • eXist project at sourceforge may be a reasonable
  • would like to see the code contributed prior to CQ clearance as long as the project does not produce builds or downloads.

ECF 2.1 release

ECF is looking to do their 2.1 release. Scott sent a message to the PMC list looking for approval.

  • Consensus is that this is good and we'd like to see the release review material
  • Jeff to reply to the email.
  • Some discussion around ECF "3.0". What is changing such that it should be called 3.0?